Transparency Rules: A Look at the Corporate Transparency Act

Non-US-based investors face the disclosure regime of the Corporate Transparency Act. What do you need to know?

Non-US-based investors that own or invest in US real estate have never been free from disclosure requirements. But the disclosure regime has historically been relatively inobtrusive. The Federal government has been ratcheting up the scope of required disclosure, in part as a response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and to rising concerns about money laundering through real estate ownership.

On January 1, 2021, Congress enacted the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), the most significant expansion in over twenty years of requirements to disclose the identity of individuals who own or control entities engaged in business in the US. While the CTA applies both to domestic and to some non-US-based entities, and is not limited to real estate activities, when fully implemented its effect on non-US-based investors and sponsors of commingled vehicles in which these investors participate will be substantial. The CTA is very much a work in progress, and many of its significant provisions are to be defined in regulations due within one year from enactment. As a result, critical questions as to its reach and scope are unanswered. It will not be effective until these regulations are issued.

This article analyzes the principal provisions of the CTA and its effect on non-US-based investors. It offers some preliminary thoughts about issues to consider immediately, and unresolved issues to be tracked. Finally, it makes the point that the CTA should not be ignored.

In the past, governmental disclosure requirements have largely been confidential (e.g., Department of Commerce reporting), levied on third parties (e.g., financial institutions for know-your-customer vetting) or title insurance companies (e.g., Geographic Targeting Orders of the US Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN]), and narrow in scope. In contrast, the CTA is imposed on entities themselves, information gathered is prescribed to be kept confidential but can be shared by FinCEN, and, for the entities involved, may be quite intrusive. There is a broad list of exempt classes of entities, but the remaining targets cover a substantial segment of owners, operators and investors.

Of particular interest, a nonUS entity is not a “reporting company” unless it has qualified to do business in the US. It may have to be reported by others as a beneficial owner, but it may not have to report its own owners or control parties—it may effectively be a blocker. We await the regulations for confirmation.

The CTA will also affect lenders and other third parties. CTA compliance may create conflicts between sponsors and investors, as the former will favor compliance (due to civil and criminal fines and penalties) and the latter may resist disclosure. The existence of the CTA may have a retarding effect on foreign investment in US real estate or may reorient strategies for investment.


The US has been criticized for allowing investment through entities whose ultimate beneficial ownership and control parties are not disclosed to governmental authorities (let alone publicly). The use of “shell companies” to hide illegal activity, including money laundering by criminal or terrorist sources, has been a perennial concern. Efforts under the USA Patriot Act and other so-called anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) enactments and of the FinCEN have been criticized as incomplete. The CTA culminates a multi-year effort to prescribe more robust disclosure.


The CTA creates a beneficial ownership registry, which FinCEN will administer. This database is not publicly available, but can be used by FinCEN and made available to Federal and state law enforcement entities and some foreign governmental entities for law enforcement purposes, including tax administration. If a disclosing entity consents, data can be shared with financial institutions for use in their KYC and AML/CFT compliance activities. No doubt, some financial institutions will request or insist on a borrower’s consent.


The CTA requires “reporting companies” to report, including corporations, limited liability companies and “similar entities” formed in the US or formed in foreign jurisdictions and qualified to do business in the US. The scope of the terms “reporting companies” and “similar entities” is left to the regulations, to be issued within one year of enactment. The important question of whether partnerships, trusts, and other forms of business organization are “similar” is unresolved.

There are at least twenty classes of entities exempted from reporting because they were deemed sufficiently regulated or carry too low a risk. A non-US-based entity that is not qualified to do business in the US is exempt from reporting. However, a reporting company in which an exempt entity has a substantial interest, directly or indirectly, or over which an exempt entity exerts substantial control, must still identify the exempt entity itself. An exempt entity can perhaps function as a kind of blocker, so that information about its investors and control parties need not be disclosed.

An illustrative list of exempt entities includes: public companies that have issued a class of securities registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; certain investment companies, brokers or dealers; pooled investment vehicles operated by certain exempt entities and US persons owned or controlled by US persons, with a physical presence in the US and with at least twenty full-time employees and US$5 million of gross receipts or gross sales. Reference should be made to the CTA, and eventually to regulations, for a more precise definition.


Reporting companies must report the name and specified personal information of any individual who directly or indirectly, by contract, relationship, arrangement, understanding, or otherwise, exercises “substantial control” over (or owns or controls 25% or more of) the beneficial interests in the reporting company. These terms are to be further defined in regulations, but their scope could be quite broad and the definition is laced with ambiguities. Moreover, complex capital stacks and decision-making parameters may make a determination of ownership or control more a matter of art than an objectively determinable fact. Do the terms include officers, directors, holders of powers of attorney, members with major decision rights, lenders with consent rights over operations of borrowers, trustees, and beneficiaries of trusts? Do less formal and more disbursed networks of organization or cooperation constitute a cluster of individuals as control persons? To be determined.


The CTA becomes effective when regulations thereunder are issued, which is to occur within one year after enactment.

Any reporting company formed after the effective date must, upon formation, file a beneficial ownership statement. Note that many entities are formed before the actual ownership is in place.

Any reporting company formed before the effective date must file its first beneficial ownership statement within two years after the issuance of final regulations.


GREAT LAKES / Tightening the Belts: How are shorthand labels like the “Sun Belt” and the “Rust Belt” shaping investment decisions? Should they?
AFIRE | Gunnar Branson and Benjamin van Loon

SOCIAL ISSUES / The Great Real Estate Reset: A data-driven initiative to remake how and what we build.
Brookings | Christopher Coes, Jennifer S. Vey, and Tracy Hadden Loh

SOCIAL ISSUES / Confronting the Myth: The events of the past year have driven businesses to confront racial inequity, but some still shy away from the challenges needed to make real progress.
Alfred Dewitt Ard Consulting | Shumeca Pickett

INDUSTRY OUTLOOK / CRE Prospects Post-COVID-19: How is commercial real estate set to perform in the post-COVID world?
Aegon Asset Management | Martha Peyton

HOSPITALITY / Time to Check In: If history is a guide, the time to invest in hotels is when things look bleak. This appears to be one of those times.
Barings Real Estate | Jim O’Shaughnessy

HOSPITALITY / Hoteling 2.0: The pandemic has impacted the hospitality, but a growing wave of non-traditional investors has shown heightened interest in the evolving industry.
JLL Hotels & Hospitality Group | Gilda Perez-Alvarado

RESIDENTIAL / Safe as Houses?: The future of residential investments is all about demographics—and the forces behind them.
American Realty Advisors | Sabrina Unger

RESIDENTIAL / Housing for Goldilocks : The pandemic highlights the advantages of single-family and appears to have accelerated migration to less dense, more affordable areas.
GTIS | Eliot Heher and Robert Sun

DATA CENTERS / Data Centers, Stage Center: Data center investments have proven resilient in periods of volatility—and they’re only going to become more essential and important into the future.
Principal Real Estate Investors | Bob Wobschall

CLIMATE CHANGE (WHITE PAPER) / Rather Than the Flood: A comprehensive look at climate-induced water disasters and their potential impact on CRE in the US.
New York Life Real Estate Investors | Stewart Rubin and Dakota Firenze

LOGISTICS / Reforging the Supply Chain: The only way to deliver on the service promises of a booming logistics sector requires a complete reimagination of the supply chain.
Stockbridge | David Egan

DEBT AND LEVERAGE / Leveraging Control: Though leverage is an important part of capital funding, it’s important to ask LPs if (and how) they should take control of their real estate leverage.
RCLCO Fund Advisors | William Maher and Ben Maslan

DEVELOPMENT / Recasting Risk and Return: The investment community can have an active role in economic recovery—but it will require recasting the traditional risk/return framework.
Standard REI | Shubrhra Jha

CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY ACT / Transparency Rules: Non-US-based investors face the disclosure regime of the Corporate Transparency Act. What do you need to know?
Pillsbury | Andrew Weiner

PENSIONS (WHITE PAPER) / Rising Pressures: The latest joint, in-depth report from Praedium and SitusAMC looks at rising fiscal pressures on state and local governments.
Praedium Group and SitusAMC Insights | Russell Appel, Peter Muoio, and Cory Loviglio | SitusAMC Insights

TALENT AND HR / Plugging the Skills Gap: Several trends are forcing change in the global commercial real estate industry, driving demand for new skills. How is the industry responding?
Sheffield Haworth | Max Shepherd

ESG / Operationalizing the Sustainability Agenda: During a time of unprecedented disruption, how should businesses approach the “new metrics” ESG of performance?
AccountAbility | Sunil A. Misser

Any reporting company must file an updated statement of a change to the previously reported information within one year after the change. Presumably, the regulations will clarify the materiality of changes that require an update.


Civil and criminal penalties are prescribed for a person who willfully provides false or fraudulent beneficial ownership information, or willfully fails to report, or who makes an unauthorized disclosure of such information.

Liability for individuals responsible to file, and perhaps even for their counsel, is a topic that should be tracked. At the very least, the threat of liability could create adversity between those who report (e.g., managing members, trustees, or sponsors) and those who possess the information (e.g., investors or beneficiaries), particularly since the scope of what to report is presently so uncertain. Among the open issues is the degree to which FinCEN can compel parties other than reporting companies to verify ownership and control information. However, there is no indication that parties otherwise dealing with a reporting company are affected by its failure to comply.


The CTA is not yet integrated with FinCEN’s Customer Due Diligence Rule (CDD) and does not release financial institutions from compliance with the CDD. The CTA instructs FinCEN to bring the CDD into compliance with the CTA.


While the implementation of the CTA will be deferred, and its scope will remain undefined until regulations are issued, it is not too early to consider a preliminary response.

  • The CTA bans the issuance of bearer shares evidencing ownership in covered entities. Entities that have or plan to issue bearer shares should address this.
  • Familiarize oneself with the rules for exemption.
  • Documentation for each newly formed non-exempt entity should address the obligation of each party to provide the information required by the CTA. It is not unlikely that partnerships will be included in the CTA regime, and perhaps trusts.
  • Documentation for existing entities should be examined and, if practicable, revised to reflect the pendency of CTA obligations.
  • Parties who control investment vehicles (including funds) will want to require investor cooperation and indemnification.
  • Each investor should assess its ability to obtain and willingness to disclose the requisite information. The CTA regime spreads a wide net, but planning opportunities may be available.
  • Financial institutions should be alert to changes in the CDD instituted to conform it to the CTA disclosure regime. One issue is the extent to which financial institutions will be allowed to rely on the beneficial interest registry in lieu of their own due diligence.
  • Lenders and borrowers should address the right of lenders to obtain information if the borrower consents. Lenders may want to require permission to obtain the information; borrowers may want authorization from investors to grant permission; investors may want to decline permission.

CTA and its Regulations is and will continue to be a subject which non-US-based investors in US real property should track and respond to as they are implemented.



Andrew Weiner is a Partner in the real estate practice at Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, an international law firm with a particular focus on the technology & media, energy, financial, and real estate & construction sectors.